Alex says that he got a bonus for each of the 7 years that he worked at CPA Australia. Well Well Well. What does that then say about the previous financial account disclosure to the members and the policy of the board?

If he got bonuses over the last 7 years, then did Adam and Jeff also get bonuses? Well based on the information provided to the members relating to the 2016 remuneration, then one may assume that they did.

Alex's says CPA Australia was the best job he has had. Where else would he get that income?

He says that the Naked CEO was for the kiddies and In Conversation was for adults, yet the board indicated the program was aimed at the young people. So what is the truth?

Alex talks about getting the young members to join, almost like its is a network marketing business, where the more individuals that you sign up, the more bonus income that he and Adam and Jeff and other management team were able to receive.

He is Deluded
We can all see that he loves the limelight...media celebrity
*Blames the media for the Board resigning....please! - who believes that rubbish
*Received a full bonus the last 7 years for excelling at his job!....incredible
*Did not act on his own as executed the strategy as determined by the Board....Cmon they were all in it..."as long as I get my $100k plus Directors fee - I will agree with anything you say Alex!! and I will even agree to give you $2m pa plus $4.9m termination payout"
* Naked CEO and In Conversation - to inspire leadership for kiddies and adults. so he gets in The Fonz to show that he had dyslexia and rose to become a well known artist...I can see the connection!
*Claims he did an awesome job recruiting young people and that we have 98.3 retention rate......SHOW ME THE NUMBERS!!!...the Real ones please

No it wasn't, it was Fairfax, tall poppy syndrome. He has had impeccable performance, I mean sold his rights to the naked CEO book but didn't receive a cent, 6 million young people on the naked CEO website (160,000 membership base don't forget).

Serious though he is blaming everyone. The board and the strategic plan? Come on, the board set the strategic direction, CEO formulates and executes. If he didn't want to be the face of cpa he could have said no.

Yet Alex told me he came to the Board with a radical proposal to shake up the world view of accountants and get young people on board , and If he took the CEO role they would need to back his strategy. Now, though, he makes out he was only implementing the Board strategy....

If only we could also rewrite history and reduce these outrageous salaries and fees....as Medcraft himself said in Parliament , hindsight is a wonderful thing....

In the interview Alex says he executed the strategy as per the Board and the rep council.

So it is actually not his fault !!!

At the 2015 AGM Graeme Wade was quick to defend Alex when a member dared to question the lack of detail on the high salaries. I recall Graeme saying the board asked Alex to be the face of the promotion & Alex had done so with great personal sacrifice & dedication. Graeme said Alex was hurt by the criticism which wasn't fair and we should all be thankful for his efforts!

Greame Wade was the President for the 2016 AGM. He had reason not to disclose the remunerations to the members as we now know.

Now there is a need for Adam Awty to disclose the remunerations for both the board and management team over the last 10 years to see how much, Alex actually received and how much bonus payments were made. It does appear that the members fee increases have been used to not only generate a profit and huge reported surplus, but also provide increase in fees/remunerations/bonus payments to board and management team.

The 2015 AGM showed what is wrong with CPA, when Mr Graeme Wade, the President at the time, shut down meeting as he had to go to something more important. There was clearly a lack of accounting questions and financial questions being asked about the financial report presented to the members. There is no report on the CPA website about the questions being asked by the members at the AGM, nor answers to proxy questions being put to the board about the financial accounts. CPA Australia runs this advertisement "Be recognised, Be heard" yet the board at the AGM and the way they answered proxy questions, have not done what they say in their advertisement. The members were not recognised and not heard, nor honestly answered.

Why didn't the committee members, nor the state presidents ask any questions at the AGM? Were they provided or have access to more detailed information concerning the financial accounts, that the general members can not see?

It has been reported by others on this site, that State Presidents were left in the dark and did not have access to detailed accounts, and had to let CPA HQ Melbourne attend to all issues.

So if you are in key leadership position ie state president, rep council, and the business is spending funds on large, out of control remunerations, huge bonus payments, loss making subsidiary, poorly managed and poorly run subsidiary with large expense and poor revenue streams, which is under written by cashed up Not-For-Profit organisation, then wouldn't you be asking questions?

Now some of these state presidents have advised that they were not provided with information, so what is the point of the state president and state committees?

Don't they have a budget to control with regards to state or is all state expenditure managed by CPA HQ Melbourne?

Lets take an example. Again this is an example and no disrespect intended or personal attack is made, but only to be used to make a point. Jennifer Lang was CPA Victorian Divisional Councillor, Victorian State President 2015 & 2016, and Victorian State Deputy President 2013 & 2014. Over this time, did she have access to detailed financial accounts and financial information relating to marketing strategy, issues concerning establishment of CPA Australia Advice and remunerations to management team? If you have been appointed in a senior positions to represent the many thousands of state members, why wouldn't you be asking questions about how your members funds are being spent, and why the marketing strategy is so one sided for an individual, totally unrelated to the accountants its supposed to represent? Now she was in a senior position for over two years, and has been with CPA for many years. Now she then got the gong and was appointed to the Board to represent the members, but left. So over her time as state president and deputy president, she was kept in the dark about the actual financials of CPA Australia and other important issues concerning her members which she was appointed to represent? Now she is an example only, but all the state presidents also have to answer questions and so do all the committee members over the last 10 years, because the lack of check and balances within CPA Australia appears clear. Alex Malley and management team were able to receive over the top remunerations without any proper disclosure to the members. Even the ability of the board and management team and auditor over the last ten years to comply with ASRB 124 related party disclosure needs to be reviewed and questioned.

Also are the accounts over the last ten years really "True and Fair" as disclosed by the auditor? Corporate auditors always uses the excuse, that it was not with their scope of engagement, their objective is to obtain reasonable assurance that the accounts are as a whole free from material misstatement, whether caused by fraud or error, in all material respects. Yet say that to the members of the Federal Health Services Union, the NSW RSL and other organisations where clear issues have been shown. The recent information provided by Adam Awty and Jeff Hughes concerning, S202B disclosure and Note 17 related party disclosure is clear evidence of problems.

Too much control was left in the hands of 12 individuals. Too much control, too much remuneration, unnecessary bonus payments were made to a management team, that only had to justify themselves to 12 individuals (or is that 13 including Alex Malley, the secret director). The members have no authority, no clear representation to hold the board to account and the AGM was never an opportunity for real engagement, as shown by then President Graeme Wade in 2016 and the then President Tyrone Carlin at the 2017 AGM which was moved to Singapore.

It is obvious that Mr Malley is play the victim game here. We need to stick to our plans which are:

1. Get enough support for spill motion so that we can get rip of the current board of directors and gain control of the board.

2. Appoint interim board to guide us through the reparation process and most importantly, conduct an independent review of the conduct of the former directors and executive management such as Malley & co.

3. Depending on the result of the independent review, we, members of CPA Australia, can instigate a class action against the former directors and Malley & Co.

Agree we need to stick to plan.. and also now the representative council is back published need to think about the process since currently they appoint the board ... with chair President ... Bizarre !!!! So until the process is changed we need mechanism to get passed this process.
I am sure Brett and legal advice are working in this space..

How did the marketing spend & remuneration increase each year, who approved it? what was the basis?

Did remuneration consultants prepare reports? which organisations were benchmarked?

Based on the comparison of CA ANZ CEO's salary reported in the media it would appear that CA ANZ was not a key organisation to be benchmarked against.

Otherwise how can you explain more than double of the salary?

Did the auditor raise any management letter comments in respect the quantum of various expenditure which was not for member benefit?

They say integrated reporting shows the value created for the organisation and if the auditor id sign-off on the integrated report how did they assess the reasonableness of the value created by the marketing spend. Overall the members have gone from 122K in 2008 to 155K in 2016.

So where is the value created?

May be they were looking at the brand value destroyed and the reporting of key information such as member classifications was not important.

The CIMA integrated report referenced in one of the previous conversations reports on the number of students acquired each year, the number of full members acquired each year and the number of full members at the end of the year.

In comparison to this the CPA integrated report is wrong and has been for a number of years and now it seems so has been the financial report in respect of KMP remuneration.